Saif al-Arab, son of Col Gaddafi KILLED by NATO Air strike Watch

Tenbinza
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#121
Report 7 years ago
#121
(Original post by Makaveli_The_Don)
Three grandchildren too.

:facepalm: NATO ****ed up tbh.
(Original post by illusionz)
The UN intervenes in order to protect civillians and ends up killing them. Three helpless grandchildren plus a son who was in no way involved in the regime.
(Original post by Aj12)
The feck are Nato playing at? Gadaffi as a target is debatable at best but if his Son holds no rank or position in the military then this was well beyond the resolution.

This is a hard one to call. Not sure how I feel about this


NATO have not ****ed up in anyway at all.

They are bombing strategic locations to hamper Gaddafi's genocide of the Libyan people. When you bomb places - people are going to die. When you bomb strategic locations, important people are going to die. Gaddafi's son was part of the regime, he knew he was fighting a war and he selfishly kept his three young children with him, resulting in their deaths.

NATO have an absolutely justifiable argument - while bombing an important target a leader of the regime was killed. If he kept his kids with him that was in no way Nato's fault.
3
reply
TheCount.
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#122
Report 7 years ago
#122
(Original post by Aj12)
BBC does not even have a picture of this guy. No one seems to know anything about him or who these other grandchildren are.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...ir-strike.html
0
reply
L i b
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#123
Report 7 years ago
#123
(Original post by teshla^^)
Genocide is also a violation of this so called 'international law'.
Yes, but say what you will about Gaddafi, I've never heard him being seriously accused of genocide. Genocide is not just mass killing, it is slaughter or some other forms of harm meted out on ethnic, religious or national grounds. Killing people for political reasons is not genocide.

Anyway, I wonder why you say "so called 'international law'" as if it doesn't exist, it certainly does. However it would appear in this case, Gaddafi's son was involved in military activity and was present at a military target - hence his death was far from unlawful.
1
reply
Suetonius
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#124
Report 7 years ago
#124
Saif al-Arab also participated in the massacres earlier during the conflict. We should be (and seemingly are) attempting to kill or capture Gaddafi anyway. If some of his family come down with him, only he is to blame for not relinquishing power.
0
reply
illusionz
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#125
Report 7 years ago
#125
(Original post by Tenbinza)
Gaddafi's son was part of the regime
Go do some research and get your facts right. He wasn't part of the regime. The other sons were, but the one who died wasn't. Although he had a travel ban imposed on him, he didn't have his assets in the EU siezed like all the other sons/Gadaffi himself.
0
reply
marek35
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#126
Report 7 years ago
#126
Lol, tomorrow he'll come out and say, his 15,000 sons have died due to NATO bombing.

Wont believe what he says unless there is DNA proof its him.
0
reply
Get Real
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#127
Report 7 years ago
#127
If they have intelligence that a building is being used for military purposes, then surely, they would be aware that Gaddafi and his family were in there.

I think the little "Needs to be verified" stance from NATO confirms this enough.
0
reply
Tenbinza
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#128
Report 7 years ago
#128
(Original post by illusionz)
Go do some research and get your facts right. He wasn't part of the regime. The other sons were, but the one who died wasn't. Although he had a travel ban imposed on him, he didn't have his assets in the EU siezed like all the other sons/Gadaffi himself.
Why did he not go to a safer, non-military location then?
0
reply
User414413
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#129
Report 7 years ago
#129
(Original post by milkytea)
What is the difference between killing a normal Gaddafi loyalist soldier and his son?
(Original post by Democracy)
And nothing of value was lost...
These. Also, there's no confirmation of death hence I'm kind of skeptical. It wouldn't surprise me if he's still alive.
0
reply
Aj12
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#130
Report 7 years ago
#130
Remember people anyone inside a military target is a legitimate target its perfectly legal.
0
reply
hash007
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#131
Report 7 years ago
#131
(Original post by Inzamam99)
If they had murdered Bush and all others involved in planning the immoral and illegal invasion of Iraq in 2001 then tens of thousands of deaths also would not happened?

Would you have supported an assassination of the former President of the United States? If not then why not? Surely his actions resulted in the deaths of thousands as well.
Excellent point there my friend.
0
reply
rei dos reis
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#132
Report 7 years ago
#132
Why does his son matter more than anyone else's. And he's probably impregnated half of lybia anyway, no loss.
0
reply
crazycake93
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#133
Report 7 years ago
#133
(Original post by Aj12)
Remember people anyone inside a military target is a legitimate target its perfectly legal.
I guess... But what about hostages? Do they deserve to die?
0
reply
Aj12
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#134
Report 7 years ago
#134
(Original post by crazycake93)
I guess... But what about hostages? Do they deserve to die?
No and to this point Nato has been trying to avoid hitting targets where civilians are present. Thing is mistakes will be made its the nature of war.
0
reply
jakemittle
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#135
Report 7 years ago
#135
(Original post by Tenbinza)
NATO have not ****ed up in anyway at all.

They are bombing strategic locations to hamper Gaddafi's genocide of the Libyan people. When you bomb places - people are going to die. When you bomb strategic locations, important people are going to die. Gaddafi's son was part of the regime, he knew he was fighting a war and he selfishly kept his three young children with him, resulting in their deaths.

NATO have an absolutely justifiable argument - while bombing an important target a leader of the regime was killed. If he kept his kids with him that was in no way Nato's fault.
Its not a genocide..
And youre an idiot. NATO are only permitted to impose a No-Fly Zone and protect civilians, this was, apparently, a house! What prove do they have that any decision making or anything was coming from there?
Also they have killed 4 civilians! His son did not hold any position within the military.
They do not have a justifiable argument whatsoever...
they are obviously about regime change which is NOT permitted by the UN.

According to you its okay to kill people that are part of the regime?..Does this include civilians who want to protect Gaddafi?
0
reply
jakemittle
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#136
Report 7 years ago
#136
(Original post by Aj12)
Remember people anyone inside a military target is a legitimate target its perfectly legal.
thats completely wrong, you cant killed non-armed personnel
0
reply
jakemittle
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#137
Report 7 years ago
#137
(Original post by milkytea)
What is the difference between killing a normal Gaddafi loyalist soldier and his son?
His son may not support Gaddafi's regime, also he is part of the Gaddafi family and may not be trained in warfare whereas a loyalist solider is a trained and paid and loyal member of his army..?
0
reply
Fusilero
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#138
Report 7 years ago
#138
(Original post by Aj12)
BBC does not even have a picture of this guy. No one seems to know anything about him or who these other grandchildren are.
Yes, Al-Jazeera also suspects there's no such guy :holmes:
0
reply
Aj12
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#139
Report 7 years ago
#139
(Original post by jakemittle)
thats completely wrong, you cant killed non-armed personnel
If they are in military targets and they were not the aim of the strike and the nation involved had no clue they were there. Its not our fault Gadaffi stationed a very important military command center in his home
0
reply
lonelykatana
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#140
Report 7 years ago
#140
Let me just point something out....
In 1986, Gaddafi's spokesman said one of his daughters had been killed in an attack on his compound in Tripoli. It was later proven to be completely untrue.

So until we have confirmation, I don't think any of us should be taking this without at least a slight bit of scepticism.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Have you registered to vote?

Yes! (551)
37.82%
No - but I will (114)
7.82%
No - I don't want to (102)
7%
No - I can't vote (<18, not in UK, etc) (690)
47.36%

Watched Threads

View All